A man claiming to be a spokesperson for the Freedom Front Plus (FFP) told a public hearing into the land expropriation without compensation debate which took place in Ermelo, Mpumalanga that parts of the province belong to Swaziland.

Warner Weber told the committee that he had received three separate delegations from the King of Swaziland and all three of those delegations agreed that parts of Mpumalanga belonged to the Swazi people.

Weber also told the committee that the land which now belonged to white people was never stolen from black people, but that black people had stolen the land from the Khoisan people. Weber questioned why white farmers should sacrifice land which it had legally obtained from the Swazi King.

Webber added: “Now I have a counter question to you, when the black people 600 years ago, crossed the Limpopo River there were Khoisan here. The question is when you encountered the Khoisan did you buy the land or did you negotiate with them or did you simply take the land?"

Briefly.co.za gathered that Weber claims that the Swazi delegation agreed that the land in question was properly bartered and paid for and not stolen by settlers. He said Hendrik Poetjiter acquired the land in question when he traded 100 cattle with the King of Swaziland in 1860.

Zanele Nonyana from the Traditional Healer’s Association said they wanted access to land in order to harvest plants used in traditional medicine. Nonyana said white farmers fenced off parts of mountains which limited what healers could harvest.

Nonyana said white farmers blocked healers from having decent access to all the plants, bushes and trees which were a part of their culture. She said the association wanted free land so they could better serve their communities.

SowetanLive.co.za reported that another farmer threatened to interdict the public hearings with a court order. Hennie Las said the committee was biased and was not inclusive of all those who had a stake in the matter.

He added that Section 25 of the Constitution should not be amended to allow for land expropriation without compensation. Las said the Constitution had enough scope for the government to enact land reform.

Critics of the proposed land expropriation bill have questioned why the government had not started land reform by issue some of the 4 000 farms and properties it owned to people.